Click the above link for maximum LOLs.
So, there's a lot of fear flying around about this big Ebola outbreak that's going on in west Africa, and it's only gotten worse since the transport of an infected American doctor back to the US. The popular thing seems to be preparing for a massive stateside Ebola outbreak, which, once you learn a little about Ebola, you will see has a laughably abysmal chance of happening. How about we fly some facts back with him?
First, let's start with a question: What is Ebola, anyway? Ebola is a virus, meaning that it requires a susceptible host cell to be 'alive' and replicate, it is otherwise inert in the environment. That also means that Ebola is affected by antibiotics about as much as it is by Benadryl (see also: not at all), as antibiotics only affect bacteria. Ebola has various strains that are recognized by the US CDC, not all of which are pathogenic in people (Ebola Reston). The virus typically arises in human populations due to an introduction from a wild animal, and is classically native to central Africa; though some non-pathogenic strains have been identified in animals from the Philippines. The virus can transmit person to person, but historically, this has always been by fluid transmission, not airborn transmission (airborn transmission has been noted in pigs and monkeys with Ebola Reston). The virus also has a very lengthy incubation period, making it highly susceptible to public health measures like quarantine and isolation. The severe virulence combined with the fact that the virus spreads by fluid contact means that most outbreaks since we started keeping track in the 70's have simply burned themselves out in one hundred victims or less.[1] Note that in the first two outbreaks, the case load was quite severe, in part due to the fact that nobody knew much of anything about Ebola at the time.
Second, what makes Ebola so dangerous? That's a difficult question to answer, because the exact mechanism of the hemorrhagic part of the hemorrhagic fever isn't known yet, at least to my knowledge. Also, some strains are more virulent (cause worse disease) than others. The basic answer, though, is that in some- not all- patients, the virus causes severe internal bleeding, and the patient dies of hypovolemic shock. To an individual, an Ebola infection is a life threatening event. To a population, however, the story is a little different. The outbreak of Ebola Zaire in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leon has been recognized since march. As of 7/28, there have been a cumulative total of 1201 suspected cases and 672 casualties. That's 672/1201= 55% of reported cases resulting in a fatality, which is still pretty awful, but nowhere near the slate-wiping pandemic it's cracked up to be. Also, with 1201 recognized cases, minus 86 at the time of the initial announcement divided by 120 days (four months between march and July at 30 days each, roughly) equals 9.3 new infections a day, assuming that all infections are cases (symptomatic)- which they aren't.[2] This is in countries that don't have average healthcare, good infection control standards, good sanitation, or even good public health or education measures in place. On the 2000 WHO ranking of 191 countries' healthcare systems, Guinea comes in at #161, Liberia is #186, and Sierra Leon didn't even rank.[3]
In general, the spread of Ebola is facilitated by cultural practices that aren't preformed in the first world. Family members, not trained morticians, handle the bodies and prepare them for burial, and many of these people do not have access to the kind of protective equipment or even basic clean running water and soap necessary to prevent exposure of mucous membranes and open cuts to infected bodily fluids. Another reason that Ebola spreads so easily in these countries is in part due to subpar healthcare systems, where healthcare workers also lack basic body substance isolation equipment like disposable gloves, and needles can get re-used among patients. Symptomatic healthcare workers then come into contact with other uninfected patients and may transmit the disease to them as well.
Now, to consider the case of the good doctor. He's being flown back in field biohazard containment, and he will remain in biohazard containment for the duration of his disease. We actually have a really good track record of disease containment in this country, and even if Ebola did get out, we'd be able to stop its spread fairly easily with basic public health measures such as isolation procedures and quarantines. As Ebola is not a persistent infection, he should be okay for release back into the public once his symptoms resolve. What if the plane crashes? His body, and his Ebola, would likely be incinerated in the subsequent fire. Even if there wasn't a fire and the plane magically broke apart over Manhattan, it's unlikely that the resulting aerosol would pose a hazard to anyone.
What about terrorists? What about terrorists. It's not like there's an epidemic going on in Africa where anyone could just walk in, find an infected person and walk right back- oh wait, yeah, just kidding. Also, the US isn't the only nation with stockpiles of Ebola, you can believe that the Russians have it too, and they aren't exactly known for incredible security in the early post-soviet era. It's pointless to fret about someone nabbing the doctor here in the US and using him to create a biohazard incident. Besides, if you're afraid, the terrorists win, and that's not an America I want to live in.
Why bother taking him over here? I don't know, maybe because our healthcare facilities are just a little better than what Guinea's got going on. That's just a guess, though.
How do you know if you have Ebola? You don't have Ebola, get over yourself.
Ebola's a zombie virus?! Not even kind of close. The victims are alive until they're dead, and then they stay dead. Nobody gets aggressive, nobody tries to eat anyone, people mostly just lay around and die. The video game series Resident Evil did, however, base their zombie-making T-Virus off of Ebola.
Someone told you they could treat Ebola with colloidal silver. And when did they work in a BSL-4 lab, or treat Ebola in the field? This statement is so full of shit, it could be a septic tank. Save your hard-earned money. There's no evidence to date that colloidal silver would have any effect on Ebola virions in the body, and there are no approved antivirals or vaccines available at this time, though there is one in the works. In fact, there's no peer-reviewed evidence to my knowledge that colloidal silver works on anything at all, except to turn you into a smurf.
So let me lay the cards on the table right here and now: you are
[1]http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvrd/spb/mnpages/dispages/Fact_Sheets/Ebola_Fact_Booklet.pdf
[2]http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/guinea/recent_updates.html
[3]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Health_Organization_ranking_of_health_systems
